Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1
Nov 10, 2013 2:25pm EST
? >> i'm happy to answer questions. i don't have a statement to give. thomas hung yar. >> the justice's remarks you and the questions they had, overall by imposing a civic orthodoxy of neutrality. this opposed neutrality would define what theological terms may be used in this prayer, an impossible task, and would have the courts imposing official prayers. being exploited by the government to proselytize or denigrate particular faiths, then it's not constitutionally a problem and it is not permissible for the courts to regulate the content of the prayer. and there's no claim that the prayers of the town of greece violate those prohibitions, and therefore they're constitutional. >> what's wrong with giving clergy and ministers guidelines and guidance as to what's acceptable and unacceptable? >> it depends on what the guidelines are. if the guidelines are what the mavs want here, which is to say you can pray in these words to these deities but not in those words to those deities, that is government regulating the theological content of prayers prescribing what is orthodox and what is not
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1